.I had a feeling that this was going to happen after Johnson softly back peddled out of being a contender.

I don't know what to make of this.

It took me years, but I went from loving Ep. 7 to loathing what a rehash it was. After this criticism was leveled his way, Abram's defense was that he was tasked with "reminding film goers" of the heart of the Star Wars universe, blah, blah, and blah. I can't find the quote now, but it sort of was inferring that the flag needed to be raised for the franchise after the Prequels. SOMETHING like that...

Well, if that WAS his Kennedy/Disney assigned task then...

Did Ep. 7 actually succeed at it?

I don't know.

I'm surprised at my lack of response to this news.

Abrams did some really brave and interesting stuff at the start of "Lost." But is he a strong finisher? "Lost" ended in an extremely cliched way, but there's no denying it, it was also handled extremely poetically.

I don't know.

My only Hope at this point is that in spite of the un-inspirational visual design choices made by Johnson, that Rian took a hammer to the universe plot-wise, and did something truly interesting with it. This would force Abram to respond to it, and perhaps raise his game.

I warned you all.. You all brought this on with TFA after bashing Lucas mercilessly over the Prequels. Now you all have to live with your shame. This is Lucas' middle finger to you all for ripping the Prequels despite how original they were compared to anything JJ Abrams shits out. Just watch, Episode IX is going to be a remake of ROTJ. Let's watch the Porgs take on the First Order with primitive technology! Hurrah, Finn escapes an exploding superweapon (Death Star IV maybe?) in a Falcon-like ship! Watch the duel between Evil Luke (After he turns to the Dark Side) and Rey! And we all get to sit through the Force Ghost ending all over again only with Luke added to it. And you know it's going to happen. Mark my words, when you see this unfold in 2019, Think back to 2015 and now September 12, 2017 that I warned you all, not once but twice of Abrams' hack directing.

Just remember, blood is on your hands because you spent the last decade prior to 2015 shaming Lucas over his "lack of directing and writing skillz" only to allow an even bigger hack to come in and fuck with the sequel trilogy. And the ST wasn't even needed in the first place. ROTS wrapped up the saga nicely.

What they did with TFA already ruined the sequel trilogy for me, so I'm not even mad. I simply don't care anymore. As times passes, I'm more and more glad that Lucas managed to finish his saga. THE saga.

What they did with TFA already ruined the sequel trilogy for me, so I'm not even mad. I simply don't care anymore. As times passes, I'm more and more glad that Lucas managed to finish his saga. THE saga.

Yep. ST came along because SW fans as a WHOLE demanded for more trilogies. Lucas was going to do just the Anthology films. He even had an outline for Han Solo that he gave to Kasdan. But Lucas definitely didn't want to do 7-9. Yet, people pestered him and said, "Gimme 7 NOW!" That's how this whole shit got started. BECAUSE OF YOU FANS. You guys couldn't shut the fuck up about a Sequel Trilogy when Lucas wanted to is just do Indy 5, and likely Willow 2. So, he gave you guys the middle finger and sold the whole shit to Disney because he knew YOU FANS, yes YOU FANS are insatiable and couldn't be satisfied with just six films. In my opinion, SW Fans are no better than these Apple sheep who weasel out of their payment plans just to get a next gen iPhone. They'll line up for the newest thing that's released no matter how shitty the product is.

.I'd caution in attacking the Star Wars fans who aren't thrilled with the Prequels.

It doesn't matter how one looks at Lucas' writing, it's hard to come away from it with any other conclusion other than it's ham-fisted at times.

The best writing from him came from during his time that he was still married to his first wife, an Oscar-winning script writer. Quite the coincidence, I must say...

He has some brilliant ideas told over the long term, and he shared them with the public in some pretty subversive ways. So subversive, in fact, that most people totally miss The Point of the films. I admire him for this, and would condemn the public for their ignorance, but...that's the way the public usually is. Oblivious to the massive powers that shape virtually everything they perceive.

But he...struggles...with believable, non-clunky dialogue. Lucas is a fry cry from Shakespeare.

Some of cinema's most cringe worthy scenes came from his mind. Mainline battle droids who walk like ducks with a stick up their butts, and who sound like Daffy Duck. Chewbacca doing the Tarzan swing and yell. The entire courtship of Anakin and Padme. The lifeless scenes from the Senate (politics CAN be told in an interesting way!). Anakin's and Obi-Wan's Mario World final duel. Christensen's overacting (he is a VERY good actor, unless he's prompted for "MORE anguish"). Boba Fett's jetpack bump into the sarlacc pit, etc. And his mind unleashed cringe worthy creations: the Jedi Council (who could connect with them as characters?), Ewoks, Death Star II, virtually all of the new additions to the Special Editions, and more.

This doesn't take away the things that he did right. He is a trailblazer bar none. But that doesn't excuse some of his very, VERY bad calls. They are his alone to hold.

And the comment that Lucas' Star Wars story is entirely told via Ep. 1-6 is "sort of" right. EXCEPT that he DID generate substantial content for Ep. 7-9. What that is, we may never know, although I'd love to see it myself.

Lucas' approach to the Prequels made the story seemingly "entirely" told by the end of Ep. 6, and that makes any film made by anyone set after Ep. 6 a tricky beast to pull off. The Ultimate Force Prophecy has already been fulfilled - what other story of the same impact is left to be told? That's the problem: it can't. Lucas ensured that himself.

I don't want to put any time into listing Abrams' Star Wars sins - they're too many to list. I'll touch on just one can of worms that he opened... He overpowered Force Adepts in a major way. Kylo Ren is able to literally FREEZE blaster bolts in thin air, and to command them to proceed again. Ren isn't even fully trained yet, and look how over the top powerful that is. With that set as the Power Bar, I wouldn't be surprised if Johnson depicts Force Adepts stopping lightsaber/equivalent weapons with their bare hands.

For Abrams, there is very little that isn't Over The Top, and that can lead to huge problems.

False. Marcia Lucas didnt co-write the screenplay with George. It was Willard and Gloria Huyuck. Are you serious? When Lucas showed the final draft for ANH to Hollywood studios and friends, they all took a pass on the script except for 20th Century Fox. You know why Hollywood took a pass on ANH? It's because they thought the script was garbage even down to the dialogue even with the rewrites. The prequels wasn't any different on paper. When was the last time a sci-fi movie had shitty dialogue? The 50's and the 60's. Lucas was just evoking the feel of these movies he grew up with. That's why Star Wars as a whole could be described as a sci-fi serial because it's presented as "episodes." Two things that saved ANH from being a complete disaster was that Marcia helped edit the movie (and yes both subsequent sequels that followed according to the 40th anniversary documentary/interview they did with her.) The second thing that saved it was that Lucas had the confidence of a "rogue" Fox executive by the name of Alan Ladd Jr. even with the British production crew snickering and laughing behind Lucas' back. (Gee, see a pattern here? People ridiculing George Lucas for passionately wanting to do what he set out to do?) Without Ladd's backing, the movie would not have secured financial backing. It would have been a total flop and we'd be sitting here singing praise for Abrams' Trekverse (Good thing CBS had the sense to abort it and return Trek to its original timeline eh?)

For the problems the Prequels had, I would take Hayden's so-so performance over a blatant remake of ANH and pass it off as Episode VII. Even Harrison Ford didn't care enough to step in and say, "Why am I doing Obi-Wan's old role in this one?" Likewise, Kasdan who co wrote Empire and Jedi despite his problems with George Lucas didn't seem to want to rein in Abrams a little. He just cared about handing in two scripts (TFA and Solo) and getting out of Dodge City. That's all. I bet somewhere Kasdan is regretting that he told Lucas to go fuck himself on the set of ROTJ compared to the bullshit he had to deal with from Disney and Abrams.

For the record, I liked SOME changes in the Special Editions like the ANH Jabba scene, remember, Lucas wanted it there since '77 and he got his wish. ANH SE is more or less the definitive version of what Lucas wanted to do in '77 but couldn't. Changes I didn't care for: the fake ANH rocks CGI addition, the addition of "NOOOO" to the part where Vader tosses Palpatine into the DS II shaft, Hayden as a Force Ghost and the revised Han shoots first scene. The changes I'm ok with: the aforementioned Jabba scene, Ian McDiarmnd as Emperor in Empire, the expanded galactic celebrations in ROTJ. I liked the shuttle sequence in Empire.

The point being I would rather take ANYTHING George Lucas has done in the 2000's over remakes of movies we've seen before.

Apparently, you've missed the possible First Order Death Star that's shown-up in the marketing for TLJ.

This decision makes more sense than pushing the final film to a new director. I'm sure Abrams has heard the criticisms about the lack of originality in TFA. Hopefully, he challenges himself and crafts something singular.

Apparently, you've missed the possible First Order Death Star that's shown-up in the marketing for the TLJ.

This decision makes more sense than pushing the final film to a new director. I'm sure Abrams has heard criticisms about the lack of originality in TFA. Hopefully, he challenges himself and crafts something singular.

I knew about the packaging art but some fans point out that the alleged DS in the art looks exactly like the ANH DS.. seriously, compare both pictures of DS 1 and "DS3."

I used IV as a roman numeral because to me Starkiller Base was a giant Death Star. I should just call Starkiller Base "Death Star III" since that's what it basically is.

Yeah. I guess Chris Terrio will cowrite with JJ. Argo was pretty cool, but BVS....ugh.

BvS's problems were more WB's fault than Snyder's because they forced him into sacrificing the quality of a standalone movie about Batman and Superman at odds with each other and turning it into a backdoor pilot for the DCEU (per the Dawn of Justice subtitle). Plus, some things like the Martha scene are more to blame on David Goyer than Chris Terrio, who usually writes intelligent things. That's why I think Justice League will be WAY better than BVS, because Chris Terrio, Jeremy Irons, Geoff Johns, Ben Affleck, Zack and Deborah Snyder said Justice League is supposed to be a fun, straight, coherent, light-hearted, adventurous, plot-and-character focused movie that will work because of a collaborative effort between Snyder, Geoff Johns, Ben Affleck and newly confirmed screenwriter Joss Whedon who directed the additional JL filming for Snyder so he could be with his family to mourn the death of their daughter. So, hold off your judgements on Chris Terrio writing Episode IX until JL comes out November 17th.

Apparently, you've missed the possible First Order Death Star that's shown-up in the marketing for TLJ.

This decision makes more sense than pushing the final film to a new director. I'm sure Abrams has heard the criticisms about the lack of originality in TFA. Hopefully, he challenges himself and crafts something singular.

I seriously doubt it because filmmakers like Abrams live in a bubble universe where creative integrity/cinematic merit is secondary to mass populism and box office. Not mutually exclusive of course, but JJ Abrams is everything that's wrong with the Hollywood system. A filmmaker that's based his entire directing career (with one exception I believe) on making inferior sequels and reboots. And populist media would have you believe that his Star Wars, Star Trek is actually 'better' than the originals... just like they'd have us believe that Taylor Swift et al are 'better' than The Beatles, Dylan, Mozart etc. It's quite depressing really the state of contemporary popular culture... and I'm waiting for the moment that Abrams cranks out an actual steaming turd and Hollywood claim it at his best work yet...

Yeah. I guess Chris Terrio will cowrite with JJ. Argo was pretty cool, but BVS....ugh.

BvS's problems were more WB's fault than Snyder's because they forced him into sacrificing the quality of a standalone movie about Batman and Superman at odds with each other and turning it into a backdoor pilot for the DCEU (per the Dawn of Justice subtitle). Plus, some things like the Martha scene are more to blame on David Goyer than Chris Terrio, who usually writes intelligent things. That's why I think Justice League will be WAY better than BVS, because Chris Terrio, Jeremy Irons, Geoff Johns, Ben Affleck, Zack and Deborah Snyder said Justice League is supposed to be a fun, straight, coherent, light-hearted, adventurous, plot-and-character focused movie that will work because of a collaborative effort between Snyder, Geoff Johns, Ben Affleck and newly confirmed screenwriter who directed the additional JL filming for Snyder so he could be with his family to mourn the death of their daughter. So, hold off your judgements on Chris Terrio writing Episode IX until JL comes out November 17th.

As someone who thought TFA tried too hard to be ANH redux, I'm actually happy JJ is directing Ep. 9. We have someone very familiar with the current story being told, and someone who I'm sure has better knowledge on how to bring that story to its conclusion. A harder job for someone coming in from the outside to pull off.

To his credit, JJ was critical of himself for certain aspects of TFA, so I think the opportunity he has to revisit the same franchise offers him a chance to improve upon parts of TFA he felt fell short.

I still think a Spielberg-directed Star Wars film is the ultimate theater experience awaiting to be had. If LFL does a Yoda-centric film, there's no one better to tell that story than Spielberg.

If you're talking 1997-and-on/Dreamworks-era Spielberg (minus Crystal Skull), there's a huge difference. But nix the Beard's collaboration with John Williams in his 70s and 80s output and you have something uncannily similar to what Abrams is about. But I'm speaking in strictly visually stylistic terms that can be appreciated without any behind-the-scenes insight (i.e. directorial style). That could, of course, suggest a more significant difference. In any case, Abrams' Super 8 and that somewhat obsequious 2007 TED talk showed his hand.

If you're talking 1997-and-on/Dreamworks-era Spielberg (minus Crystal Skull), there's a huge difference. But nix the Beard's collaboration with John Williams in his 70s and 80s output and you have something uncannily similar to what Abrams is about. But I'm speaking in strictly visually stylistic terms that can be appreciated without any behind-the-scenes insight (i.e. directorial style). That could, of course, suggest a more significant difference. In any case, Abrams' Super 8 and that somewhat obsequious 2007 TED talk showed his hand.

I don't buy that AT ALL. Spielberg never had to make a movie using an old script (see: Trek into Darkness which is basically Wrath of Kahn redux.) Spielberg never had to use that "Lens flare up the wazoo" effect" in all of his films. Super 8 was the ONLY film that he emulated Spielberg on. The only reason Super 8 succeeded at what it set out to convey is simply because Spielberg had to closely supervise the production. He was able to rein Abrams in on the lens flare stuff and help tighten up the story. I cant see Paramount or Disney/New Lucasfilm doing that with Abrams because they're still ga ga over his body of work which is still comprised of special effect spectacles. If Disney used the Lucas treatments and kept Abrams on a tight leash, I would think TFA would have turned out much better than what we got. Sadly, Rogue One ended up being the better movie because the concept actually came from a LFL employee who understood what George Lucas would do and his philosophy on Star Wars as a whole.

It's funny. My earliest recollection of lens flares in film was through Spielberg's films. CE3K certainly has 'em "up the wazoo." The UFOs in that film are practically unidentified flying lens flares. And Spielberg's second-closest collaborator, Janusz Kaminski, lives and breathes flared light. A trait found in pre-Kaminski Spielberg films, though seldom noted.

But maybe I wasn't specific enough. The shared characteristics I'm referring to involve, beyond lens flares (in a non-pejorative sense), a similar use of long takes, blocking, framing and anamorphic lenses. All coupled with a strong visual effects focus and attachment to celluloid film.

No, I disagree. I've seen CE3K and there was never a big ass lens flare every second in that one the way Abrams does with his films. Kaminski was brought in only because Slocombe had come down with an illness that left him completely blind and forced him to retire from Indiana Jones. Funny, Kaminski claimed Crystal Skull looks exactly like Raiders when I don't remember Raiders that BRIGHT. I don't recall the other three Indiana Jones films using vibrant color tone on film. These films looked more natural in color tone compared to Crystal Skull. I mean even the use of light coming into the sets in that one looked horribly fake. But to Kaminiski's credit, his use of fllters/color tone improved post-Crystal Skull. I mean, Lincoln and Bridge of Spies looked way more natural more realistic like than Crystal Skull.

It's funny. My earliest recollection of lens flares in film was through Spielberg's films. CE3K certainly has 'em "up the wazoo." The UFOs in that film are practically unidentified flying lens flares. And Spielberg's second-closest collaborator, Janusz Kaminski, lives and breathes flared light. A trait found in pre-Kaminski Spielberg films, though seldom noted.

But maybe I wasn't specific enough. The shared characteristics I'm referring to involve, beyond lens flares (in a non-pejorative sense), a similar use of long takes, blocking, framing and anamorphic lenses. All coupled with a strong visual effects focus and attachment to celluloid film.

I disagree completely. With all respect, I think you're confusing 'similar styles' and 'shared characteristics' with Abrams penchant for copying/imitating Spielberg. It's artistic plagiarism. Nothing more. Now of course imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I suspect that's why Spielberg has time for him... that and the fact that Hollywood is one of the most cynical and insincere industries in the West.

The extent to which Abrams appallingly derivative work is lauded by Hollywood is hugely cynical. That there is no sense of irony in his movies only serves to underline his key objective... to wit; to stand on the shoulders of giants and pass it off as his own work. Star Trek: Into Darkness and The Force Awakens being the zenith of that cynical filmmaking. To compare Abrams to Spielberg, is (IMHO) reducing the language of cinema to its most base level.

Song as old as rhyme. Every artist stands on the shoulders of those before them and even contemporarily. Art is rarely, if ever, created and successful in a vacuum.

This familiar line of criticism could be applied to Spielberg and his very obvious and as-touted influences and inspirations in Lean, Ford, Capra, Hitchcock, Curtiz and Wyler. It's just hip to casually bash successful neophytes in this day, age and medium. Or in any time, really.

But maybe I'm over-extending myself. I originally meant that when you get a helping of Abrams, you're undoubtedly getting a helping of Spielberg, for better or worse. I'm not saying that they're on the same level at all (I also hold Spielberg in higher regard) but the former can suggest what the latter would likely do in the Star Wars sandbox. But it very obviously wouldn't be one-to-one/the genuine article.

I'm not sure one can criticise Spielberg for being derivative and plageristic of other films and filmmakers. He isn't perfect, he's a bit over sentimental for me, and some of his shots (even in his more serious films) are sometimes too contrived that they undermine the verisimilitude of the scene... so my criticism of Abrams isn't borne from an unquestioning love of Spielberg. It may be 'hip' to criticise Abrams (I personally wasn't aware that this was the case), but it's also apparent that filmmakers/artists/musicians etc. increasingly get perceived without an understanding of the wider context.

I understand that you are not stating that Abrams is as good/better than Spielberg, and I don't have an issue with you liking Abrams style or his films; I just don't think it helps to compare them, unless one is compearing them specifically to contrast what can be achieved through 'popular' cinema that can, in some way, transcend the form e.g Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders of the Lost Ark, ET... to 'popular' cinema that does not transcend or progress the form e.g. Super 8, Star Trek 09/Into Darkness and The Force Awakens. For me the comparison only serves to underline that Abrams is much more interested in style over substance... but that's just my view.

Kelly Marie Tran isn’t so much in the action as much as the last Jedi. She is however involved in an action sequence alongside Finn at some point

Hux is not involved in the latter of the film. Not to say he dies early, but his power position is diminished and he is not a primary antagonist

Richard E Grant plays a tyrannical First Order general

the Knights of Ren are certainly in the film and their screen time is surprisingly lengthy – Matt Smith is said to have been on set dressed in dark robes and holding a lightsaber prop

Kylo has his helmet re forged but is more often helmetless in the latter half

Ben pilots the falcon

Poe also flies the falcon, alongside Naomi Ackie’s Vera Calrissian

Keri Russell is involved with Luke’s storyline

Luke is involved in a flashback scene with Han and Leia wherein Ben is dropped off for training to a young Luke – an 8 year old Ben was cast and he will have a talk with Luke about wanting to be a Jedi and a guardian of the good in the galaxy

So, I know this is the wrong thread, but what is the correct one? Mods ...?

LUCASFILM LOGO - This really bothers me and I have not seen anything about it anywhere. The Lucasfilm logo animation sparkles all green and then dark and then golden, but in the sequels it is all dark. No green or gold. WTF? Why?

Disney wanting to differentiate the new films from the Lucas produced films or to represent a new era or something? Who knows. Why did Lucas update it back in 97, simply to make it more flashy and modern I guess.

OK. This article is a real relief, especially after listening to the Collider folks whine for a while (just a while, that gossip format is waaaay too long) about there being NO PLAN for the trilogy as a whole. I never felt that could be true. Directorial room to wiggle, sure; story options, sure! But there was always a central, guiding conversation about the plot and characters of the ST.